Table of Contents

Executive Summary


1 Introduction

New Graph Environment and Nupqu Limited Partnership were retained by the Canadian Wildlife Federation in the fall of 2020 to plan and conduct fish passage assessments and habitat confirmation assessments at road-stream crossings within the Elk River watershed group. Although planning for assessments was conducted for both the Elk River watershed upstream of the Elko Dam near Elko, BC and the Flathead River, assessments focused on the Elk River and tributaries upstream of the Elko Dam.


The health and viability of freshwater fish populations can depend on access to tributary and off channel areas which provide refuge during high flows, opportunities for foraging, overwintering habitat, spawning habitat and summer rearing habitat (Bramblett et al. 2002; Swales and Levings 1989). Culverts can present barriers to fish migration due to increased water velocity, turbulence, a vertical drop at the culvert outlet and/or maintenance issues (Slaney, Zaldokas, and Watershed Restoration Program (B.C.) 1997). Reconnection of fragmented habitats is a management action that can generate some of the highest ecological returns on economic investments relative to other habitat restoration techniques (Saldi-Caromile et al. 2004).

2 Background

As a result of high-level direction from the provincial government, a Fish Passage Strategic Approach protocol has been developed for British Columbia to ensure that the greatest opportunities for restoration of fish passage are pursued. A Fish Passage Technical Working Group has been formed to coordinate the protocol and data is continuously amalgamated within the Provincial Steam Crossing Inventory System (PSCIS). The strategic approach protocol involves a four-phase process as described in Fish Passage Technical Working Group (2014) :


The scope of 2020/2021 project activities reported on in this document includes planning for and implementation of the first two phases of fish passage assessment in the Elk River watershed upstream of the Elko Dam.


2.1 Project Location

To focus the project area on habitat with high value for conservation of westslope cutthrout trout, the project was focused within the upper Elk River watershed upstream of the Elko Dam located at Elko, BC with planning also conducted for the Flathead River watershed.


Overview map of Study Areas

Figure 2.1: Overview map of Study Areas


Hydrograph for Elk River at Fernie (Station #08NK002 - Lat 49.503471 Lon -115.070129). Available daily discharge data from 1970 to 2018.

Figure 2.2: Hydrograph for Elk River at Fernie (Station #08NK002 - Lat 49.503471 Lon -115.070129). Available daily discharge data from 1970 to 2018.


Summary of hydrology statistics in Elk River at Fernie (Station #08NK002)

Figure 2.3: Summary of hydrology statistics in Elk River at Fernie (Station #08NK002)


2.2 Fisheries

Fish species recorded in the Elk River watershed group are detailed in Table 2.1 (MoE 2020b).


Table 2.1: Fish species recorded in the Elk River watershed group.
Scientific Name Species Name Species Code
Catostomus catostomus Longnose Sucker LSU
Catostomus commersoni White Sucker WSU
Catostomus macrocheilus Largescale Sucker CSU
Family: Salmonidae Cutthroat Trout CT
Oncorhynchus clarki clarki x Oncorhynchus mykiss Cutthroat/Rainbow cross CRS
Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi Westslope (Yellowstone) Cutthroat Trout WCT
Oncorhynchus mykiss Rainbow Trout RB
Oncorhynchus nerka Kokanee KO
Oncorhynchus sp Fish are either RB or CT, but suspect they are CT CT/RB
Prosopium williamsoni Mountain Whitefish MW
Ptychocheilus oregonensis Northern Pikeminnow NSC
Rhynichthys cataractae Longnose Dace LNC
Richardsonius balteatus Redside Shiner RSC
Salvelinus confluentus Bull Trout BT
Salvelinus fontinalis Brook Trout EB

2.2.1 Westslope Cutthrout Trout

3 Methods

Workflows for the project can be classified into four categories: planning, fish passage assessments, habitat confirmation assessments and reporting.

3.1 Planning

To identify priorities for crossing structure rehabilitation, background literature, fisheries information, PSCIS, Fish Habitat Model outputs modified from Norris and Mount (2016) and bcfishpass (Norris 2020) outputs were reviewed. The Fish Habitat Model was developed by the BC Ministry of Environment to provide estimates of the amount of fish habitat potentially accessible to fish upstream of crossing locations. The model calculates the average gradient of BC Freshwater Atlas stream network lines at minimum 100m long intervals starting from the downstream end of the streamline segment and working upstream. The network lines are broken into max gradient categories with new segments created when the average gradient of the stream lines exceeds user provided gradient thresholds.


Norris (2020) recently created bcfishpass which are sql and python based shell script libraries that “generate a simple model of aquatic habitat connectivity by identifying natural barriers to fish passage (plus hydro dams that are not feasible to remediate) and classifying all streams not upstream of these barriers as ‘potentially accessible’. On potentially accessible streams,”bcfishpass scripts “identify known barriers and additional anthropogenic features (primarily road/railway stream crossings, i.e. culverts) that are potentially barriers. To prioritize these features for assessment or remediation,” the scripts “report on how much modelled potentially accessible aquatic habitat the barriers may obstruct. The model can be refined with known fish observations. Depending on the modelling scenario, all aquatic habitat downstream of a given fish observation can be classified as ‘observed accessible’, overriding any downstream barriers.”


Following delineation of “non-fish habitat” with the Fish Habitat Model, the average gradient of each stream segment within habitat classified as below the 22% threshold was calculated and summed using bcfishpass to quantify upstream habitat potentially available for westslope cutthrout trout and facilitate stream line symbology based on stream morphology. bcfishpass summed average gradients within seven categories (0 - 3%, 3 - 5%, 5 - 8%, 8 - 15%, 15 - 22%, 22 - 30% and >30%) with these outputs further amalgamated to summarize and symbolize potential upstream habitat in four categories: riffle/cascade (0 - 5%), step-pool (5 - 15%), step-pool very steep (15-20%) and extremely steep (20 - 30%) (Table 3.1). For each crossing location, the linear length of stream habitat upstream of crossings and <20% was summarized by average gradient and the area of lake and wetland habitat upstream was collated and reviewed to give an indication of the potential quantity and quality of habitat potentially gained should fish passage be restored.


Table 3.1: Stream gradient categories (threshold and average) and associated channel type.
Gradient Channel Type
0 - 5% Riffle and cascade pool
5 - 15% Step pool
15 - 20% Step pool - very steep
20 - 30% Step pool - extremely steep (bull trout only)
>30% Non fish habitat


To prepare for Phase 1 and 2 assessments in the study area, past fish passage assessment reports for the Elk River watershed group were first reviewed to identify crossing structures not yet assessed or previously ranked as priorities for rehabilitation in VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013) and Grainger (2011). To determine which of those crossings had not yet been assessed with Phase 2 assessments we cross-referenced these reports with only Phase 2 report completed in the study area (Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015) and reviewed outputs from the Fish Habitat Model and bcfishpass. Outputs for modelled and PSCIS crossings that met the following criteria underwent a detailed review to facilitate prioritization for Phase 1 - Fish Passage and/or Phase 2 - Habitat Confirmations.

  • Stream crossing barriers and potential barriers on streams with confirmed fish presence upstream of the structure.
  • Stream crossing barriers and potential barriers on streams documented as ≥ 2.0m wide with linear lengths of modeled upstream habitat <22% gradient for ≥1km.
  • Stream crossing barriers and potential barriers located on streams classified as 3rd order or higher.
  • Stream crossing barriers and potential barriers located on streams with >5 ha of modeled wetland and/or lake habitat upstream of the structure.
  • Stream crossing barriers and potential barriers on streams with habitat value rated as “medium” or “high” in past fish passage assessment data.


3.2 Fish Passage Assessments

In the field, crossings prioritized for follow-up were first assessed for fish passage following the procedures outlined in “Field Assessment for Determining Fish Passage Status of Closed Bottomed Structures” (MoE 2011). Crossings surveyed included closed bottom structures (CBS), open bottom structures (OBS) and crossings considered “other” (i.e. fords). Six digit numerical crossing identifiers were generated by bcfishpass for each of the crossings modelled. Crossings identified in the field that had no corresponding GIS generated ID were given unique identifiers beginning with the date in YYYYMMDD format appended with an identifier between 1 and 10 (ex. 2020091601). Photos were taken at surveyed crossings and when possible included images of the road, crossing inlet, crossing outlet, crossing barrel, channel downstream and channel upstream of the crossing and any other relevant features. Additionally, the following information was recorded for all surveyed crossings: date of inspection, crossing reference, crew member initials, Universal Transverse Mercator (UTM) coordinates, stream name, road name and kilometer, road tenure information, crossing type, crossing subtype, culvert diameter or span for OBS, culvert length or width for OBS. A more detailed “full assessment” was completed for all closed bottom structures and included the following parameters: presence/absence of continuous culvert embedment (yes/no), average depth of embedment, whether or not the culvert bed resembled the native stream bed, presence of and percentage backwatering, fill depth, outlet drop, outlet pool depth, inlet drop, culvert slope, average downstream channel width, stream slope, presence/absence of beaver activity, presence/absence of fish at time of survey, type of valley fill, and a habitat value rating. Habitat value ratings were based on channel morphology, flow characteristics (perennial, intermittent, ephemeral), fish migration patterns, the presence/absence of deep pools, un-embedded boulders, substrate, woody debris, undercut banks, aquatic vegetation and overhanging riparian vegetation (Table 3.2). For crossings determined to be potential barriers or barriers based on the data (see Barrier Scoring), a culvert fix and recommended diameter/span was proposed.


All field data collected including photos were uploaded to the Provincial Stream Crossing Inventory System (PSCIS).

Table 3.2: Habitat value criteria (Fish Passage Technical Working Group, 2011).
Habitat Value Fish Habitat Criteria
High The presence of high value spawning or rearing habitat (e.g., locations with abundance of suitably sized gravels, deep pools, undercut banks, or stable debris) which are critical to the fish population.
Medium Important migration corridor. Presence of suitable spawning habitat. Habitat with moderate rearing potential for the fish species present.
Low No suitable spawning habitat, and habitat with low rearing potential (e.g., locations without deep pools, undercut banks, or stable debris, and with little or no suitably sized spawning gravels for the fish species present).


3.3 Barrier Scoring

Fish passage potential was determined for each stream crossing identified as a closed bottom structure on fish bearing and potentially fish bearing stream reaches. The combined scores from five criteria: depth and degree to which the structure is embedded, outlet drop, stream width ratio, culvert slope, and culvert length were used to screen whether each culvert was a likely barrier to some fish species and life stages (Table 3.3, Table 3.4. These criteria were developed based on data obtained from various studies and reflect an estimation for the passage of a juvenile salmon or small resident rainbow trout (Clarkin et al. 2005 ; Bell 1991; Thompson 2013).


Table 3.3: Fish Barrier Scoring (MoE 2011).
Risk Embedded Value Outlet Drop (cm) Value SWR Value Slope (%) Value Length (m) Value
LOW >30cm or >20% of diameter and continuous 0 <15 0 <1.0 0 <1 0 <15 0
MOD <30cm or 20% of diameter but continuous 5 15-30 5 1.0-1.3 3 1-3 5 15-30 3
HIGH No embedment or discontinuous 10 >30 10 >1.3 6 >3 10 >30 6


Table 3.4: Fish Barrier Scoring Results (MoE 2011).
Cumlative Score Result
0-14 passable
15-19 potential barrier
>20 barrier


3.4 Habitat Confirmation Assessments

Following fish passage assessments, habitat confirmations were completed in accordance with procedures outlined in the document “A Checklist for Fish Habitat Confirmation Prior to the Rehabilitation of a Stream Crossing” (Fish Passage Technical Working Group 2011). The main objective of the field surveys was to document upstream habitat quantity and quality and to determine if any other obstructions exist above or below the crossing. Habitat value was assessed based on channel morphology, flow characteristics (perennial, intermittent, ephemeral), the presence/absence of deep pools, un-embedded boulders, substrate, woody debris, undercut banks, aquatic vegetation and overhanging riparian vegetation. Criteria used to rank habitat value was based on guidelines in Fish Passage Technical Working Group (2011) and summarized in Table ??.


During habitat confirmations, to standardize data collected and facilitate submission of the data to provincial databases, information was collated on “Site Cards”. Habitat characteristics recorded included channel widths, wetted widths, residual pool depths, gradients, bankfull depths, stage, temperature, conductivity, pH, cover by type, substrate and channel morphology (among others). When possible, the crew surveyed downstream of the crossing to the point where fish presence had been previously confirmed and upstream to a minimum distance of 600m. Any potential obstacles to fish passage were inventoried with photos, physical descriptions and locations recorded on site cards. Surveyed routes were recorded with time-signatures on handheld GPS units.


Fish sampling was conducted a subset of sites when biological data was considered to add significant value to the physical habitat assessment information. When possible, electrofishing was utilized within discrete site units both upstream and downstream of the subject crossing with electrofisher settings, water quality parameters (i.e. conductivity, temperature and ph), start location, length of site and wetted widths (average of a minimum of three) recorded. For each fish captured, fork length and species was recorded, with results included within the fish data submission spreadsheet. Fish information and habitat data will be submitted to the province under scientific fish collection permit CB20-611971.


##Reporting

This pdf report and an online interactive report were generated with bookdown (Xie 2016) from Rmarkdown (Allaire et al. 2020) documents processing raw data available at the New Graph Environment Github Site. In addition to numerous spatial layers sourced through the BC Data Catalogue, data inputs for this project can be sourced here and include:


3.4.1 Cost Benefit Analysis

A cost benefit analysis was conducted for each crossing determined to be a barrier based on an estimate of cost associated with remediation or replacement of the crossing with a structure that facilitates fish passage and the amount of potential habitat that would be made available by remediating fish passage at the site (habitat gain index).


3.4.2 Habitat Gain Index

The habitat gain index is the quantity of modelled habitat upstream of the subject crossing and represents an estimate of habitat gained with remediation of fish passage at the crossing. For this project, a gradient threshold between accessible and non-accessible habitat was set at 20% (for a minimimum length of 100m) intended to represent the maximum gradient of which westslope cutthrout trout are likely to be able to migrate upstream. For Phase 1 assessments a “net” value of habitat quantity output from bcfishpass was used to estimate the amount of habitat upstream of each crossing less than 20% gradient before either a falls of height >5m - as recorded in MoE (2020c), a road-stream crossing recorded in PSCIS as a barrier, or a modelled unassessed crossing. For Phase 2 assessments, the amount of potential habitat upstream of each crossing was estimated by measuring the amount of mainstem and stream segments > 1st order upstream of the crossing using the measure tool within QGIS (QGIS Development Team 2009).


Potential options to remediate fish passage were selected from MoE (2011) and included:
* Removal (RM) - Complete removal of the structure and deactivation of the road. * Open Bottom Structure (OBS) - Replacement of the culvert with a bridge or other open bottom structure. For this project we considered bridges as the only viable option for OBS type based on consultation with FLNR road crossing engineering experts. It should be noted however, that box culverts could be considered a viable and economical option as they have been observed as successfully facilitating fish passage on the west coast of the province (Betty Rebellato, Canadian Wildlife Federation - Project Biologist). * Streambed Simulation (SS) - Replacement of the structure with a streambed simulation design culvert. Often achieved by embedding the culvert by 40% or more. Based on consultation with FLNR engineering experts, we considered crossings on streams with a channel width of <2m and a stream gradient of <8% as candidates for replacement with streambed simulations. * Additional Substrate Material (EM) - Add additional substrate to the culvert and/or downstream weir to embed culvert and reduce overall velocity/turbulence. This option was considered only when outlet drop = 0, culvert slope <1.0% and stream width ratio < 1.0. * Backwater (BW) - Backwatering of the structure to reduce velocity and turbulence. This option was considered only when outlet drop < 0.3m, culvert slope <2.0%, stream width ratio < 1.2 and stream profiling indicates it would be effective..


Cost estimates for structure replacement with bridges and embedded culverts were generated based on the channel width, slope of the culvert, depth of fill, road class and road surface type. Road details were sourced from FLNRORD (2020b) and FLNRORD (2020a) through bcfishpass. Interviews with Phil MacDonald, Engineering Specialist FLNR - Kootenay, Steve Page, Area Engineer - FLNR - Northern Engineering Group and Matt Hawkins - MoTi - Design Supervisor for Highway Design and Survey - Nelson were utilized to helped refine estimates. Base costs for installation of bridges on forest service roads and permit roads with surfaces specified as rough and loose was estimated at $12500/linear m and assumed that the road could be closed during construction. For streams with channel widths <2m embedded culverts were reported as an effective solution with total installation costs estimated at $25k/crossing (pers. comm. Phil MacDonald, Steve Page). A multiplier table was generated to estimate incremental cost increases due to the type of road with costs estimated for structure replacement on paved surfaces, railways and arterial/highways costing up to 20 times more than forest service roads due to expenses associate with design/engineering requirements, traffic control and paving. The cost multiplier table (Table 3.5) used for cost estimates in this study is a “rough first draft”, should be considered very approximate and refined for future projects.


Table 3.5:
Class Surface Class Multiplier Surface Multiplier Bridge $K/m Streambed Simulation $K
Forest Service Road Loose 1 1 12.5 25
Local Loose 1 1 12.5 25
Road Permit Loose 1 1 12.5 25
Unclassified Loose 1 1 12.5 25
Unclassified Rough 1 1 12.5 25
Collector Paved 1 2 25.0 50
Local Paved 1 2 25.0 50
Rail Rail 5 2 125.0 250
Arterial Paved 10 2 250.0 500
Highway Paved 10 2 250.0 500

4 Results

Field assessments were conducted between September 16 2020 and October 17 2020 by Allan Irvine, R.P.Bio, Kyle Prince, P,Biol and Mark Fjeld, BiT.

4.1 Phase 1

A total of 72 phase 1 assessments were conducted between with site details and photos presented in [Appendix - Phase 1 Fish Passage Assessment Data and Photos]. A cost benefit analysis for phase 1 sites is summarized in Table 4.1.


Table 4.1: Modelled upstream habitat estimate and cost benefit for Phase 1 assessments.
PSCIS ID Stream Road Stream Width (m) Priority Fix Cost Est ( $K) Habitat Upstream (m) Cost Benefit (m / $K) Cost Benefit (m2 / $K)
197525 Tributary to Elk River Spur from Elk River FSR 1.00 low RM NA 940 NA NA
197529 Littlemoor Creek Lower Elk Valley Road 1.00 low SS-CBS 500 145 0.3 0.1
197537 North Littlemoor Creek Highway 43 1.60 mod SS-CBS 500 533 1.1 0.9
197569 Tributary to Elk River Cokato Road 2.10 low OBS 250 748 3.0 3.1
197576 Tributary to Elk River Fernie ski hill 1.40 low SS-CBS 25 58 2.3 1.6
197576 Tributary to Elk River Fernie ski hill 1.50 low SS-CBS 25 58 2.3 1.7
197576 Tributary to Elk River Fernie ski hill 1.50 low SS-CBS 25 58 2.3 1.7
197577 Tributary to Elk River Fernie ski hill 1.30 low SS-CBS 25 85 3.4 2.2
197579 Tributary to Elk River Highway 3 3.30 mod OBS 2500 1616 0.6 1.1
197580 Tributary to Elk River Dicken Rd 2.20 low OBS 250 225 0.9 1.0
197583 Bean Creek Highway 3 3.20 mod OBS 2500 1772 0.7 1.1
NA Bean Creek Dicken Rd 2.00 mod OBS 250 404 1.6 1.6
NA Dalzell Creek Driveway 2.50 low OBS 2500 264 0.1 0.1
NA Dalzell Creek Driveway 1.20 low SS-CBS 500 1294 2.6 1.6
NA Dalzell Creek Lower Elk Valley Road 3.80 low OBS 2500 206 0.1 0.2
NA Weigart Creek Highway 43 4.30 high OBS 250 NA NA NA
NA Brule Creek Highway 43 6.10 high OBS 305 NA NA NA
NA Tributary to Elk River Lower Elk Valley Road 0.00 low SS-CBS 500 620 1.2 0.0
NA North Littlemoor Creek Lower Elk Valley Road 1.50 low SS-CBS 500 635 1.3 1.0
NA Tributary to Elk River McGiverin Road 0.50 low SS-CBS 25 471 18.8 4.7
NA Tributary to Elk River Cokato Road 0.65 low SS-CBS 50 94 1.9 0.6
NA Whiting Creek Highway 43 0.60 low SS-CBS 500 569 1.1 0.3
NA Tributary to Elk River Highline Drive (Fernie ski hill) 2.30 mod OBS 475 219 0.5 0.5
NA Tributary to Elk River Line creek mine road 0.50 low SS-CBS 50 492 9.8 2.5
NA Brule Creek Busato Road 7.10 high OBS 355 NA NA NA
NA Littlemoor Creek Highway 43 1.20 mod SS-CBS 500 2508 5.0 3.0
NA Hollow Creek Highway 43 1.10 low SS-CBS 500 0 0.0 0.0
NA Tributary to Elk River Cokato Road 4.10 low OBS 250 36 0.1 0.3
NA Tributary to Whiting Creek Lower Elk Valley Road 0.50 low SS-CBS 500 273 0.5 0.1
NA Hartley Creek Dicken Road 3.50 high OBS 250 NA NA NA
NA Tributary to Elk River Railway 2.70 low OBS 125 28 0.2 0.3
NA Tributary to Grave Creek NA 1.50 low SS-CBS 25 5421 216.8 162.6
NA Tributary to Elk River Fernie Nordic Trail 2.00 mod OBS 125 1747 14.0 14.0
NA Grave Creek NA 0.10 low SS-CBS 25 181 7.2 0.4
NA Cokato Creek Cokato Road 4.50 low OBS 250 688 2.8 6.2
NA Tributary to Elk River Hadner FSR 2.90 low OBS 162 0 0.0 0.0
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 1.00 low SS-CBS 25 1504 60.2 30.1
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 2.50 low OBS 125 2233 17.9 22.3
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 2.00 low OBS 125 762 6.1 6.1
NA Crossing Creek Elk River FSR 2.50 low OBS 125 1481 11.8 14.8
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 1.00 low SS-CBS 50 NA NA NA
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 2.30 low OBS 125 1178 9.4 10.8
NA Tributary to Lowe Creek Elk River FSR 1.10 low SS-CBS 25 1348 53.9 29.7
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 3.50 high OBS 625 NA NA NA
NA Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 3.10 low OBS 125 2865 22.9 35.5
NA Lowe Creek Elk River FSR 2.50 mod OBS 125 6563 52.5 65.6
NA Tributary to Elk River Spur from Elk River FSR 1.00 low SS-CBS 25 0 0.0 0.0
NA Tributary to Elk River Driveway 1.50 low SS-CBS 50 NA NA NA
NA Tributary to Elk R Hwy 3 2.70 low OBS 2500 195 0.1 0.1
NA Tributary to Hartley Creek Hartley Lake Rd 1.80 low SS-CBS 25 1332 53.3 48.0
NA Tributary to Hartley Creek Hartley Lake Rd 6.70 low OBS 168 484 2.9 9.7

4.2 Phase 2

Habitat confirmation assessments were conducted at 15 with a total of approximately 15 km of stream assessed. Five crossings were rated as high priorities for remediation design, Eight crossings rated as moderate priorities, 1 crossing was rated as a low priority and 1 rated as “no fix”.


Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Tables 4.2 - 4.5


Table 4.2: Overview of habitat confirmation sites.
Site Stream Road Tenure UTM (11U) Fish Species Habitat Gain (km) Habitat Value Priority Comments
50152 Tributary to Lizard Creek Mt.Fernie Park Rd NA 637987 5483407 NA 2.7 High high NA
50155 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road MoTi recreation 635113 5484261 EB, WCT 1.8 Medium moderate NA
50159 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road MoTi recreation 633320 5484601 NA 0.3 Medium moderate NA
50181 Tributary to Morrissey Creek Lodgepole FSR NA 648276 5468176 NA 0.5 Medium high NA
50185 Tributary to Morrisey Creek River Rd FLNR 5466 645683 5469025 EB, WCT 4.5 High moderate NA
50261 Tributary to Michel Creek Flathead FSR NA 669027 5481115 NA 0.0 Low no fix NA
62423 Harriet Lake Creek Grave Creek FSR Unknown 660508 5524239 NA 2.4 Low low NA
62425 Grave Creek Spur Canfor R08362 661486 5524426 NA 0.2 Medium moderate NA
62426 Grave Creek Spur Canfor R08362 661611 5524460 NA 1.8 Medium moderate NA
62516 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road MoTi recreation 636123 5484087 NA 0.5 Medium moderate Fry observed upstream and downstream
197533 Brule Creek Busato Rd MoTi local 651626 5528888 RB, WCT, BT 0.1 High high Deactivate
197534 Weigart Creek Highway 43 MoTi highway 650144 5532055 NA 11.6 High high NA
197542 Hartley Creek Dicken Road MoTi collector 643534 5490723 NA 7.2 High high NA
197555 Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR FLNR 0103 646735 5554534 BT 6.0 High moderate NA
197559 Brule Creek Highway 43 MoTi highway 651516 5528829 RB, WCT 23.0 Medium moderate NA


Table 4.3: Summary of Phase 2 fish passage reassessments.
PSCIS ID Embedded Outlet Drop (m) Diameter (m) SWR Slope (%) Length (m) Score Result
50152 No 0.90 0.9 2.9 1.5 30 37 Barrier
50155 No 0.22 0.9 2.5 2.6 11 26 Barrier
50159 No 1.60 0.8 3.1 8.0 12 36 Barrier
50181 No 0.95 1.2 2.2 7.0 30 42 Barrier
50185 No 0.00 2.2 2.0 3.4 17 29 Barrier
50261 No 1.80 2.7 1.7 12.0 19 39 Barrier
62423 No 0.18 0.9 1.6 0.5 12 21 Barrier
62425 No 0.47 1.2 3.1 7.5 12 36 Barrier
62426 No 0.25 1.2 2.9 5.0 12 31 Barrier
62516 No 0.49 1.2 2.1 5.0 11 36 Barrier
197533 No 0.70 3.3 2.2 4.0 20 39 Barrier
197534 No 0.15 3.2 1.3 3.4 18 34 Barrier
197542 No 0.40 2.6 1.3 2.0 20 34 Barrier
197555 No 1.48 1.5 2.3 3.5 49 42 Barrier
197559 Yes 0.00 2.5 2.4 2.5 35 22 Barrier


Table 4.4: Cost benefit analysis for Phase 2 assessments.
pscis_crossing_id stream_name road_name downstream_channel_width_meters crossing_fix_code cost_est_1000s uphab_net_sub22 cost_net cost_area_net
50152 Tributary to Lizard Creek Mt.Fernie Park Rd 2.60 OBS 438 2208 5.0 6.6
50155 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road 2.25 OBS 125 1081 8.7 9.7
50159 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road 2.45 OBS 125 0 0.0 0.0
50181 Tributary to Morrissey Creek Lodgepole FSR 2.60 OBS 125 0 0.0 0.0
50185 Tributary to Morrisey Creek River Rd 4.30 OBS 125 1796 14.4 30.9
50261 Tributary to Michel Creek Flathead FSR 4.60 OBS 125 738 5.9 13.6
62423 Harriet Lake Creek Grave Creek FSR 1.44 SS-CBS 25 1578 63.1 45.5
62425 Grave Creek Spur 3.70 OBS 125 1684 13.5 24.9
62426 Grave Creek Spur 3.50 OBS 125 509 4.1 7.1
62516 Tributary to Lizard Creek Island Lake Lodge Road 2.47 OBS 125 619 5.0 6.1
197533 Brule Creek Busato Rd 7.10 OBS 178 128 0.7 2.6
197534 Weigart Creek Highway 43 4.30 OBS 2500 1206 0.5 1.0
197542 Hartley Creek Dicken Road 3.50 OBS 250 278 1.1 1.9
197555 Tributary to Elk River Elk River FSR 3.50 OBS 312 6845 21.9 38.4
197559 Brule Creek Highway 43 6.10 OBS 3050 763 0.3 0.8


Table 4.5: Summary of Phase 2 habitat confirmation details.
Site Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
50152 675 2.6 2 0.3 3.0 moderate high
50155 700 2.2 1.6 0.3 10.5 abundant high
50159 400 3.0 2.6 0.4 11.2 moderate high
50181 515 2.9 2.2 0.3 12.4 moderate medium
50185 740 4.0 2.8 0.4 6.2 moderate high
50261 220 5.2 3.6 0.6 12.0 moderate medium
62423 725 1.2 0.8 0.2 4.4 moderate medium
62425 170 3.5 2.1 0.3 5.0 moderate high
62426 650 3.9 1.6 0.4 11.9 moderate medium
62516 730 2.0 1.3 0.3 7.6 moderate high
197533 125 5.5 3.8
1.5 moderate high
197534 1100 6.6 4.6 0.5 4.5 moderate high
197542 725 6.1 3.8 0.5 3.5 moderate high
197555 675 5.9 3.8 0.4 5.9 abundant high
197559 1600 7.7 2.3 0.6 3.5 moderate high

5 Recommendations

Recommended next steps for fish passage restoration in the Elk River watershed group include:

Appendix - Crossing 50155

Island Lake Lodge Road - Tributary to Lizard Creek

Site Location

Crossing 50155 is located on a tributary to Lizard Creek, approximately 75m upstream from the confluence with Lizard Creek. The stream is located approximately 100m east of the location where it is mapped on the freshwater atlas stream layer. Island Lake Lodge Road is an extension of Mt.Fernie Park Road with access to Highway 3 located within Fernie city limits. The are is a popular recreational destination for hikers and mountain bikers. Island Lake Lodge is a year round tourist destination providing accomodations, guided hiking and backcountry catskiing for clients.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is 2nd order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 1.8km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 1945m to 1080m at the culvert. One 12m long bridge (PSCIS 197543) is located upstream of the subject crossing approximately 575m on the Lazy Lizard bike trail and another 7m long bridge structure is located downstream also on a recreational trail. A search of provincial records yielded no fisheries information for the stream (MoE 2020d). Downstream, Lizard Creek supports westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace (MoE 2020b).


PSCIS stream crossing 50155 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large size of the stream relative to other tributary streams in the watershed, the previously rated high value habitat and because it was prioritized for follow up by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013). The habitat confirmation was completed on September 22, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.113.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 0.9m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 11m, a culvert slope of 2.6%, a stream width ratio of 2.5 an outlet drop of 0.22m (Table 5.1). Water temperature was 9\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.7 and conductivity was 480uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 100m to Lizard Creek. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.6, Figure 5.2). The average channel width was 2.2m, the average wetted width was 1.9m and the average gradient was 4.3%. Habitat value was rated as medium with good potential for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing but a lack of deep pools for adult overwintering and rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 700m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as abundant with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, boulders, undercut banks, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.6, Figure 5.3). The average channel width was 2.2m, the average wetted width was 1.6m and the average gradient was 10.5%. There were frequent areas of gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning. Frequent pools to 40cm deep were present and associated with small and large woody debris. Habitat value was rated as high for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout rearing.


Fish Sampling

To assess potential impacts of the culvert on fish densities in the stream we electrofished upstream and downstream of the crossing. Three sites were sampled upstream and one site was sampled downstream. A total of 42 westslope cutthrout trout and 4 eastern brook trout were captured upstream with 28 westslope cutthrout trout and 2 eastern brook trout captured downstream. Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Tables 5.3 - 5.4 and Figure 5.1.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed culvert is recommended to provide unconstained access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 50155. The cost for work is estimated at $125000 for a cost benefit of $8700/linear m and $9700/m2.

Conclusion

There is an estimated 1.8km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 50155 with habitat in the areas surveyed upstream of the crossing rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. Although potentially attributable to the lower gradient habitat downstream and the proximity to the Lizard Creek mainstem, fish sampling results indicated that the crossing is potentially negatively impacting habitat capacity upstream of the crossing as higher densities of westslope cutthrout trout were captured downstream of the crossing than above. The road may be part of the Island Lake Recreational tenure or solely the responsiblity of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure.

Table 5.1: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 50155.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-22 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 50155 Diameter (m) 0.9
External ID NA Length (m) 11
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 635113 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5484261 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Lizard Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Island Lake Lodge Road Fill Depth (m) 0.3
Road Tenure MoTi recreation Outlet Drop (m) 0.22
Channel Width (m) 2.25 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.45
Stream Slope (%) 4.3 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 2.6
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:
Table 5.2: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 50155.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 700 2.2 1.6 0.3 10.5 abundant high
Downstream 100 2.2 1.9
4.3 moderate medium


Table 5.3: Electrofishing sites for PSCIS crossing 50155.
Site Location Width (m) Length (m) Area (m2) Effort (s) Effort (s/m2)
19 Downstream 1.7 40 68 200 2.9
18 Upstream 1.6 25 40 117 2.9
33 Upstream 1.6 13 21 61 2.9
34 Upstream 1.6 45 72 154 2.1


Table 5.4: Westslope cuthrout trout densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50155.
Site Location Fry Parr Adult Juvenile
19 Downstream 35.3 4.4 1.5
18 Upstream 15 12.5
33 Upstream 23.8 9.5
9.5
34 Upstream 23.6 5.6 1.4


Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50155.

Figure 5.1: Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50155.


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50155.

Figure 5.2: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50155.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50155.

Figure 5.3: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50155.

Appendix - Crossing 50159

Island Lake Lodge Road - Tributary to Lizard Creek

Site Location

Crossing 50159 is located on a tributary to Lizard Creek, approximately 150m upstream from the confluence with Lizard Creek. This crossing has also been recorded in PSCIS as crossing 62510. Island Lake Lodge Road is an extension of Mt.Fernie Park Road which is accessed from Highway 3 within Fernie city limits. The area is a popular recreational destination for hikers and mountain bikers. Island Lake Lodge is located at 1400m of elevation near Island Lake and is a year round tourist destination providing accommodations, guided hiking and backcountry catskiing for clients. The subject stream is not mapped in the freshwater atlas stream layer and may have been diverted as part of a micro-hydro facilty for Island Lake Lodge. A small building that could be a generating station was observed on aerial imagery approximately 1500m upstream of the road.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream had good flow and is located within an area of old growth cedar adjacent to a recreation trail. At the time of the survey the stream was the highest volume tributary to Lizard Creek located on the east side of the valley. No fisheries information was available for the stream (MoE 2020d), however, Lizard Creek supports westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace (MoE 2020b).


PSCIS stream crossing 50159 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the relatively large size of the stream recorded in PSCIS (channel width = 3.5m) relative to other tributary streams in the Lizard Creek watershed and because it was rated as containing high value habitat by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013) and Grainger (2011). The habitat confirmation was completed on September 22, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.113.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 0.8m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 12m, a culvert slope of 8%, a stream width ratio of 3.1 and an outlet drop of 1.6m (Table 5.5). Water temperature was 10\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.6 and conductivity was 729uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 150m to Lizard Creek. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with large woody debris dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.2, Figure 5.2). The average channel width was 2.5m, the average wetted width was 2.3m and the average gradient was 8.8%. The dominant substrate was gravels with cobbles subdominant. Some small pools and steps of 0.2 - 0.6m in height were present throughout the area surveyed. Large woody debris steps ranging from 0.4 - 0.8m high were spaced sporadically throughout area surveyed. The stream contained relatively flatter sections from 3 - 8% and steeper sections of 15 - 18% for first 350m above culvert (UTM: 11 U 632810 5484842) where the stream becomes too steep for upstream salmonid passage (35%). Habitat value was rated as moderate for salmonid fry/juvenile rearing and high value habitat for spawning.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 400m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, and deep pools (Table 5.2, Figure 5.3). The average channel width was 3m, the average wetted width was 2.6m and the average gradient was 11.2%. There were frequent areas of gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning. Frequent pools to 40cm deep were present and associated with small and large woody debris. Habitat value was rated as high for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout rearing.



Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with a bridge is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 50159. The cost for the work is estimated at $125000 for a cost benefit of $0/linear m and $0/m2.



Conclusion

There is 0.3km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 50159 with habitat in the areas surveyed upstream of the crossing rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. The road may be part of the Island Lake Recreational tenure or solely the responsiblity of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure.





Table 5.5: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 50159.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-22 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 50159 Diameter (m) 0.8
External ID NA Length (m) 12
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 633320 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5484601 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Lizard Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Island Lake Lodge Road Fill Depth (m) 1
Road Tenure MoTi recreation Outlet Drop (m) 1.6
Channel Width (m) 2.45 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0
Stream Slope (%) 9 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 8
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.6: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 50159.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 400 3.0 2.6 0.4 11.2 moderate high
Downstream 150 2.5 2.3 0.2 8.8 moderate high


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50159.

Figure 5.4: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50159.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50159.

Figure 5.5: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50159.

Appendix - Crossing 50181

Lodgepole FSR - Tributary to Morrissey Creek

Site Location

Crossing 50181 is located on a tributary to Morrissey Creek, approximately 200m upstream from the confluence with Morrisey Creek. The crossing is located on River Road just south of Morrissey approximately 15km south of Fernie. The road is accessed off of Lodgepole FSR via the Morrissey Bridge over the Elk River adjacent to Highway 3. River Road is a gravel forest tenure road (forest file id NA with active log hauling at the time of the survey.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is 4th order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 12km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2000 to 970m at the culvert. Upstream of the crossing, there are no anthropogenic barriers on the mainstem however PSCIS crossing 50181 (also recorded as PSCIS 103033) is documented as a barrier located on a significantly sized tributary entering the stream from the north-east approximately 2.8km upstream of River Road. A wetland type area is mapped at the top of the watershed (area NAha). No fisheries information was available for the stream (MoE 2020d) however westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace have been recorded downstream in Morrissey Creek (MoE 2020b).


PSCIS stream crossing 50181 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large size of the stream relative to other tributary streams in the watershed, the previously rated moderate value habitat as rated by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013). The habitat confirmation was completed on October 15, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.108.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 1.2m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 30m, a culvert slope of 7%, a stream width ratio of 2.2 and an outlet drop of 0.95m (Table 5.7). Water temperature was 4\(^\circ\)C, pH was 8.4 and conductivity was 292uS/cm. It appeared as though fish passage restoration works had taken place at the site historically as there were what appeared to be boulder riffle structures installed downstream of the crossing. The structures appeared to be effective at reducing the outlet drop size but had created a rock drop (0.4m) and were not resulting in backwatering of the culvert.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 200m to the confluence with Morrisey Creek. The mouth of the stream is located approximately 500m upstream from the confluence of Morrissey Creek and the Elk River. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with large woody debris dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, boulders, undercut banks, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.8, Figure ??). The average channel width was 4m, the average wetted width was 2.2m and the average gradient was 8%. The dominant substrate was boulders with cobbles subdominant. There were frequent pools formed by small and large woody debris ranging from 0.3 - 0.75m in depth (average residual depth = 0.3m). Pockets of small gravels suitable for resident salmonid spawning were also present. Habitat value was rated as medium with good potential for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 515m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with boulders dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, undercut banks, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.8, Figure ??). The average channel width was 2.9m, the average wetted width was 2.2m and the average gradient was 12.4%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. The stream had good flows with fry observed throughout the area surveyed. Pools to 0.6m deep (average residual depth =0.3m) were present with pockets of gravel suitable for spawning throughout. Infrequent large woody debris jams to 0.5m high were also observed. There were frequent areas of gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning. Habitat value was rated as medium for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout trout rearing.


Fish Sampling

To assess potential impacts of the culvert on fish densities in the stream electrofishing was conducted upstream and downstream of the crossing. Five sites were sampled downstream and five sites were sampled upstream. A total of 6 westslope cutthrout trout and eastern brook trout were captured upstream with 15 westslope cutthrout trout and eastern brook trout captured downstream (Figure ??). Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Tables 5.9 - 5.10 and Figure 5.6.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed structure is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 50181. The cost of the work is estimated at $125000 for a cost benefit of $0/linear m and $0/m2.


Conclusion

There is an estimated 0.5km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 50181 with habitat in the areas surveyed upstream of the crossing rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. Fish sampling results indicated that densities of westslope cutthrout trout fry and parr were similiar upstream and downstream of the crossing with a general trend of higher densities below the crossing for both life stages. River Road is under tenure of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a high priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure.

Table 5.7: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 50181.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-10-15 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 50181 Diameter (m) 1.2
External ID NA Length (m) 30
Crew MF, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 648276 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5468176 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Morrissey Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Lodgepole FSR Fill Depth (m) 3
Road Tenure NA Outlet Drop (m) 0.95
Channel Width (m) 2.6 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.18
Stream Slope (%) 7 Inlet Drop No
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 7
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:
Table 5.8: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 50181.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 515 2.9 2.2 0.3 12.4 moderate medium
Downstream 200 4.0 2.2 0.3 8.0 moderate medium


Table 5.9: Electrofishing sites for PSCIS crossing 50181.
Site Location Width (m) Length (m) Area (m2) Effort (s) Effort (s/m2)
47 Downstream 2.2 150 330 840 2.5
46 Upstream 2.2 130 286 651 2.3
Table 5.10: Westslope cuthrout trout densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50181.
Site Location Fry Parr Juvenile Adult
47 Downstream 0.3 3.3 0.6 0.3
46 Upstream
2.1


Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50181.

Figure 5.6: Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50181.




Appendix - Crossing 50185

River Rd - Tributary to Morrisey Creek

Site Location

Crossing 50185 is located on a tributary to Morrisey Creek, approximately 255m upstream from the confluence with Morrisey Creek. The crossing is located on River Road just south of Morrissey approximately 15km south of Fernie. The road is accessed off of Lodgepole FSR via the Morrissey Bridge over the Elk River adjacent to Highway 3. River Road is a gravel forest tenure road (forest file id 5466 with active log hauling at the time of the survey.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is 4th order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 12km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2000 to 970m at the culvert. Upstream of the crossing, there are no anthropogenic barriers on the mainstem however PSCIS crossing 50181 (also recorded as PSCIS 103033) is documented as a barrier located on a significantly sized tributary entering the stream from the north-east approximately 2.8km upstream of River Road. A wetland type area is mapped at the top of the watershed (area NAha). No fisheries information was available for the stream (MoE 2020d) however westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace have been recorded downstream in Morrissey Creek (MoE 2020b).


PSCIS stream crossing 50185 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large size of the stream relative to other tributary streams in the watershed, the previously rated moderate value habitat as rated by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013). The habitat confirmation was completed on September 21, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.108.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 2.2m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 17m, a culvert slope of 3.4%, a stream width ratio of 2 and an outlet drop of 0m (Table 5.11). Water temperature was 9\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.6 and conductivity was 378uS/cm. It appeared as though fish passage restoration works had taken place at the site historically as there were what appeared to be boulder riffle structures installed downstream of the crossing. The structures appeared to be effective at reducing the outlet drop size but had created a rock drop (0.4m) and were not resulting in backwatering of the culvert.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 255m to the confluence with Morrisey Creek. The mouth of the stream is located approximately 500m upstream from the confluence of Morrissey Creek and the Elk River. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with small woody debris dominant. Cover was also present as large woody debris, undercut banks, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.12, Figure 5.8). The average channel width was 4.3m, the average wetted width was 2.7m and the average gradient was 4.2%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with gravels subdominant. There were frequent pools formed by small and large woody debris ranging from 0.3 - 0.75m in depth (average residual depth = 0.4m). Pockets of small gravels suitable for resident salmonid spawning were also present. Habitat value was rated as high with good potential for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 740m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with small woody debris dominant. Cover was also present as large woody debris, undercut banks, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.12, Figure 5.9). The average channel width was 4m, the average wetted width was 2.8m and the average gradient was 6.2%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with gravels subdominant. The stream had good flows with fry observed throughout the area surveyed. Pools to 0.6m deep (average residual depth =0.4m) were present with pockets of gravel suitable for spawning throughout. Infrequent large woody debris jams to 0.5m high were also observed. There were frequent areas of gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning. Habitat value was rated as high for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout trout rearing.


Fish Sampling

To assess potential impacts of the culvert on fish densities in the stream electrofishing was conducted upstream and downstream of the crossing. Five sites were sampled downstream and five sites were sampled upstream. A total of 37 westslope cutthrout trout and 22 eastern brook trout were captured upstream with 26 westslope cutthrout trout and 3 eastern brook trout captured downstream (Figure 5.10). Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Tables 5.13 - 5.14 and Figure 5.7.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed structure is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 50185. The cost of the work is estimated at $125000 for a cost benefit of $14400/linear m and $30900/m2.


Conclusion

There is an estimated 4.5km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 50185 with habitat in the areas surveyed upstream of the crossing rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. Fish sampling results indicated that densities of westslope cutthrout trout fry and parr were similiar upstream and downstream of the crossing with a general trend of higher densities below the crossing for both life stages. River Road is under tenure of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure.

Table 5.11: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 50185.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-21 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 50185 Diameter (m) 2.2
External ID NA Length (m) 17
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 645683 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5469025 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Morrisey Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road River Rd Fill Depth (m) 1.4
Road Tenure FLNR 5466 Outlet Drop (m) 0
Channel Width (m) 4.3 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0
Stream Slope (%) 4.3 Inlet Drop No
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 3.4
Habitat Value High Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:
Table 5.12: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 50185.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 740 4.0 2.8 0.4 6.2 moderate high
Downstream 255 4.3 2.7 0.4 4.2 moderate high


Table 5.13: Electrofishing sites for PSCIS crossing 50185.
Site Location Width (m) Length (m) Area (m2) Effort (s) Effort (s/m2)
24 Downstream 2.70 40 108 361 3.3
25 Downstream 2.25 7 16 70 4.4
26 Downstream 2.60 3 8 36 4.5
27 Downstream 2.60 3 8 57 7.1
28 Downstream 3.10 7 22 170 7.7
29 Upstream 2.90 40 116 361 3.1
30 Upstream 2.67 13 35 123 3.5
31 Upstream 2.80 13 36 63 1.8
32 Upstream 4.47 18 80 223 2.8
48 Upstream 2.80 60 168 521 3.1
Table 5.14: Westslope cuthrout trout densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50185.
Site Location Fry Parr Juvenile
24 Downstream 0.9 2.8
25 Downstream 18.8
26 Downstream 12.5 37.5
27 Downstream
25 12.5
28 Downstream 50 4.5
29 Upstream 4.3 0.9
30 Upstream
5.7
31 Upstream 2.8
32 Upstream 22.5 2.5
48 Upstream 1.2 3 0.6


Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50185.

Figure 5.7: Fish densities (fish/100m2) for PSCIS crossing 50185.


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.

Figure 5.8: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.

Figure 5.9: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.


Westslope cutthrout trout captured upstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.

Figure 5.10: Westslope cutthrout trout captured upstream of PSCIS crossing 50185.

Appendix - Crossing 62423

Grave Creek FSR - Harriet Lake Creek

Site Location

Crossing 62423 is located on Harriet Lake Creek, approximately 30m upstream from the confluence with Grave Creek and accessed from Grave Creek Forest Service Road. Although the freshwater atlas stream layer mapping incorrectly indicates the subject stream is the mainstem of Grave Creek it is actually a small drainage that joins Harriet Lake Creek which flows primarily from the 6ha Harriet Lake located to the north at an elevation of 2100m approximately 4km upstream of the crossing.


Background

Harriet Lake was stocked with “wild” westslope cutthrout trout five times between 1985 and 2002 (MoE 2020a). Downstream, Grave Creek is known to contain westslope cutthrout trout, rainbow trout and bull trout (MoE 2020b). Two habitat confirmation assessments were conducted downstream on the mainstem of Grave Creek in 2014 at PSCIS crossings 62421 and 62422 (Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015). Although Heather Lamson - MoE Fisheries Biologist recommended the culverts not be removed to prevent potential hybridization of westslope cutthrout trout with stocked rainbow trout downstream (Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015), both structures had been replaced with bridges at the time of the surveys. Designs and remediations of these crossings were not recorded in PSCIS. Reassessments of these crossings were conducted by our team in 2020 and results will be loaded to PSCIS. In the field, Lotic Environmental Ltd. field teams were observed conducting two-pass closed site electrofishing in Grave Creek as part of a westslope cutthrout trout population assessment and aquatic monitoring program. Data from the program is uploaded to the Fisheries Information Summary System annually and is made available through the BC Data Catalog (MoE 2020b, 2020d).


Although the modelling of potential habitat upstream of this crossing was considered not accurate due to the incorrect mapping of Grave Creek, during field work planning, PSCIS stream crossing 62423 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large size of the modelled stream network upstream (20km) and because it was located on a stream with habitat rated as moderate value by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013). A bridge (PSCIS 62413) is located approximately 1km upstream of the crossing. The habitat confirmation was completed on September 20, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.124.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 0.9m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 12m, a culvert slope of 0.5%, a stream width ratio of 1.6 and an outlet drop of 0.18m (Table 5.15). The stream was dry at the crossing location at the time of the survey.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 30m to Grave Creek. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with overhanging vegetation dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris and boulders (Table 5.16, Figure 5.12). The average channel width was 1.3m, and the average gradient was 4%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. Habitat value was rated as low value due to a lack of flow.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert in the general location of the mapped Grave Creek streamline for 725m. As Harriet Lake Creek was the primary source of flow for the area and enters the surveyed tributary 150m upstream of the crossing location, flows were very minimal and substrate was primarily fines above its confluence. There was however, a visible channel in this location with a ford (PSCIS 197563) located approximately 600m upstream fo PSCSIS 62423. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, and boulders (Table 5.16, Figure 5.11). The average channel width was 1.2m, the average wetted width was 0.8m and the average gradient was 4.4%. Harriet Lake Creek gradients modelled at 19% just upstream of the bridge located 1km upstream and too steep for upstream westslope cutthrout passage (>20%) at 2.2km.Habitat value was rated as medium for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout rearing in Harriet Creek and low in the unnamed tributary mapped as Grave Creek due to a lack of flow.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an embedded culvert is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 62423. The cost for the work is estimated at $25000 for a cost benefit of $63100/linear m and $45500/m2.

Conclusion

There is 2.4km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 62423 with habitat in the areas surveyed upstream of the crossing rated as medium value. Although the provincial forest tenure road layer does not include Grave Creek FSR, it is likely that it is a tenure road under the responsibility of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a low priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure.


Table 5.15: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 62423.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-20 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 62423 Diameter (m) 0.9
External ID NA Length (m) 12
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 660508 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5524239 Backwatered No
Stream Harriet Lake Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Grave Creek FSR Fill Depth (m) 0.3
Road Tenure Unknown Outlet Drop (m) 0.18
Channel Width (m) 1.44 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.6
Stream Slope (%) 4 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 0.5
Habitat Value Low Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.16: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 62423.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Downstream 30 1.3
4.0 moderate low
Upstream 725 1.2 0.8 0.2 4.4 moderate medium


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62423.

Figure 5.11: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62423.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62423.

Figure 5.12: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62423.

Appendix - Crossings 62425 and 62426

Spur - Grave Creek

Site Location

PSCIS crossings 62425 and 62426 are located on Grave Creek, approximately 75m and 185m upstream from where Grave Creek splits into two channels with the majority of flow originating from the other channel flowing from the south. Of note, the confluence of Grave Creek and the other channel is located approximately 175 to the west of where the confluence is mapped - likely due to a channel redirection approximately 375m upstream that appears to have occurred due to a large woody debris jam. Three PSCIS crossings (62427, 62428 and 62429) and one un-assessed modelled crossing (modelled ID 4601159) are located upstream of 62426 however, there are very minimal quantities of potential habitat upstream of their locations. Although mapped within the digital road atlas it is suspected that the road on which both culverts are located is a forest tenure road (Canfor Forest Products Ltd. tenure) as it is located immediately adjacent to another forest tenure road and within an area utilized for forestry.


Background

Grave Creek is known to contain westslope cutthrout trout, rainbow trout and bull trout downstream of the subject culverts and westslope cutthrout trout above (MoE 2020b). Two habitat confirmation assessments were conducted downstream on the mainstem of Grave Creek in 2014 at PSCIS crossings 62421 and 62422 (Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015). Although Heather Lamson - MoE Fisheries Biologist recommended the culverts not be removed to prevent potential hybridization of westslope cutthrout trout with stocked rainbow trout downstream (Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015), both structures had been replaced with bridges at the time of the surveys. Designs and remediations of these crossings were not recorded in PSCIS. Reassessments of these crossings were conducted by our team in 2020 and results will be loaded to PSCIS. In the field, Lotic Environmental Ltd. field teams were observed conducting two-pass closed site electrofishing in Grave Creek as part of a westslope cutthrout trout population assessment and aquatic monitoring program. Data from the program is uploaded to the Fisheries Information Summary System annually and is made available through the BC Data Catalog (MoE 2020b, 2020d).


PSCIS stream crossings 62425 and 62426 were ranked as moderate priorities for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the relatively large size of the stream network upstream (3.5km) and because they contained habitat rated as moderate value by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013). The habitat confirmation was completed on September 20, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.124.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, both culverts were un-embedded, non-backwatered and considered barriers to upstream fish passage. PSCIS crossing 62425 was 1.2m in diameter with a pipe length of 12m, a culvert slope of 7.5%, a stream width ratio of 3.1 and an outlet drop of 0.47m (Table 5.17). PSCIS crossing 62426 was 1.2m in diameter with a pipe length of 12m, a culvert slope of 5%, a stream width ratio of 2.9 and an outlet drop of 0.25m (Table 5.18). Water temperature was 8\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.8 and conductivity was 370uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream of 62425

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 75m to where the stream joins the flow entering the valley from the south. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, boulders, undercut banks, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.19, Figure 5.13). The average channel width was 3.7m, the average wetted width was 1.8m and the average gradient was 7.5%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. Downstream of the crossing there were frequent sections of gravels suitable for salmonid spawning and no barriers or obstacles to fish passage. Habitat was rated as high value for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream of 62425 and Downstream of 62426

The stream was surveyed upstream from 62425 for 170m to 62426. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as large woody debris and boulders (Table 5.19, Figure 5.14). The average channel width was 3.5m, the average wetted width was 2.1m and the average gradient was 5%. There were abundant gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning throughout (Figure 5.15). Some debris jam steps to 0.8m in height were observed and there were approximately 15 westslope cutthrout trout (approximately 170mm long) in the outlet pool for crossing 62426. Habitat value was rated as high for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream of 62426

The stream was surveyed upstream from 62426 for 650m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as boulders (Table 5.19, Figure 5.14). The average channel width was 3.5m, the average wetted width was 1.6m and the average gradient was 11.9%. This stream channel showed evidence of recent disturbance with eroding banks, multiple channels and aggraded sections throughout. Steps (0.6 - 0.9m in height) due to large woody debris debris jams were frequent throughout surveyed area and at a point approximately 200 m upstream of the road-stream crossing to the top end of the area surveyed, cover was limited to sporadic pools up to 0.3m deep. As mentioned previously, the historic channel was abandoned at 175m upstream of 62426 (UTM: 11 U 661748 5524558, Figure 5.15) with no flow observed within its banks. One of the tributaries that enters Grave Creek approximately 250m upstream of 62426 was accessed off of an adjacent spur road with a raped assessment conducted 250m upstream from the confluence with Grave Creek (UTM: 11U 662083 5524708). The average channel width at this location was 1.9m and the average gradient was 9%. Immediately upstream, the gradient in this tributary was 20% representing grades not likely passable for westslope cutthrout trout migrting upstream. Overall, habitat value upstream of 62426 within the mainstem of Grave Creek was rated as medium with moderate rearing potential for fry/juvenile westslope cutthrout trout.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Replacing PSCIS crossings 62425 and 62426 with bridges is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream. The costs are estimated at $125000 and $125000 respectively for a combined cost benefit of $17600/linear m and $32000/m2.

Conclusion

There is 0.2km of habitat upstream of crossing 62425 with habitat rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing and another 1.8km upstream of 62426 rated as high. Although mapped within the digital road atlas it is suspected that the road on which both culverts are located is a forest tenure road (Canfor Forest Products Ltd. permit) as it is located immediately adjacent to another forest tenure road under permit to Canfor and within an area utilized for forestry. If this is the case, the underlying responsibility for the road belongs to the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations and Rural Development with Canfor responsible for maintenance and upgrades. The crossing was ranked as moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement.


Table 5.17: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 62425.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-20 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 62425 Diameter (m) 1.2
External ID NA Length (m) 12
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 661486 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5524426 Backwatered No
Stream Grave Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Spur Fill Depth (m) 1
Road Tenure Canfor R08362 Outlet Drop (m) 0.47
Channel Width (m) 3.7 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.38
Stream Slope (%) 7.5 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 7.5
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.18: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 62426.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-20 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 62426 Diameter (m) 1.2
External ID NA Length (m) 12
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 661611 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5524460 Backwatered No
Stream Grave Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Spur Fill Depth (m) 1
Road Tenure Canfor R08362 Outlet Drop (m) 0.25
Channel Width (m) 3.5 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.65
Stream Slope (%) 6 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 5
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.19: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossings 62425 and 62426.
Site Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
62425 Upstream 170 3.5 2.1 0.3 5.0 moderate high
62425 Downstream 75 3.7 1.8 0.3 7.5 moderate high
62426 Upstream 650 3.9 1.6 0.4 11.9 moderate medium


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62425.

Figure 5.13: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62425.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62425 and downstream of PSCIS crossing 62426.

Figure 5.14: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62425 and downstream of PSCIS crossing 62426.


Grave Creek redirection out of historic channel located upstream of PSCIS crossing 62426.

Figure 5.15: Grave Creek redirection out of historic channel located upstream of PSCIS crossing 62426.

Appendix - Crossing 62516

Island Lake Lodge Road - Tributary to Lizard Creek

Site Location

Crossing 62516 is located on a tributary to Lizard Creek, approximately 630m upstream from the confluence with Lizard Creek. This culvert has also been recorded in PSCIS as crossing 50153. The stream has been diverted from its historic channel and runs adjacent to a historic road to Lizard Creek approximately 500 downstream of the location of the confluence in the freshwater atlas. Island Lake Lodge Road is an extension of Mt.Fernie Park Road which is accessed from Highway 3 within Fernie city limits. The Mt.Fernie Provincial Park is a popular recreational destination for hikers, sightseers and mountain bikers. Island Lake Lodge is located at 1400m of elevation near Island Lake and is a year round tourist destination providing accommodations, guided hiking and backcountry catskiing.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream had good flow and is located within an area of old growth cedar adjacent to a recreation trail. At the time of the survey the stream was the highest volume tributary to Lizard Creek located on the east side of the valley. No fisheries information was available for the stream (MoE 2020d). Downstream however, Lizard Creek supports westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace (MoE 2020b).


PSCIS stream crossing 62516 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the relatively large size of the stream recorded in PSCIS (channel width = 3.5m) relative to other tributary streams in the Lizard Creek watershed and because it was rated as containing high value habitat by VAST Resource Solutions Inc. (2013) and Grainger (2011). There is a bridge (PSCIS 197566) located on the Lazy Lizard recreation trail approximatley 350m upstream of the crossing and an unassessed modelled crossing (modelled ID 4600929) approximately 950m upstream. Downstream approximately 400m there is a foot bridge (PSCIS 197544) on a recreational hiking/biking trail. The habitat confirmation was completed on September 23, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.113.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

Th culvert located at PSCIS 62516 appeared to have been replaced in 2020 with fresh rock and road fill present. At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 1.2m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 11m, a culvert slope of 5%, a stream width ratio of 2.1 and an outlet drop of 0.49m (Table 5.20). Water temperature was 9\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.9 and conductivity was 333uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 630m to Lizard Creek. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, undercut banks, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.21, Figure 5.16). The average channel width was 2.5m, the average wetted width was 1.4m and the average gradient was 2.7%. The dominant substrate was gravels with cobbles subdominant. Adjacent to the historic road, on the right bank of stream, there was very limited shrub and tree riparian vegetation. Downstream of the crossing there were frequent sections of gravels suitable for salmonid spawning and no barriers or obstacles to fish passage. Habitat was rated as high value for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 730m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with undercut banks dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.21, Figure 5.16). The average channel width was 2m, the average wetted width was 1.3m and the average gradient was 7.6%. There were abundant gravels suitable for resident westslope cutthrout trout spawning throughout (Figure 5.16). Fry were observed within the area surveyed to 540m upstream of the culvert where gradients increased to >20% for a distance of approximately 15m. Although no sampling was conducted, no fish were observed above this high gradient section. Habitat value was rated as high for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed structure is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 62516. The cost of the work is estimated at $125000 for a cost benefit of $5000/linear m and $6100/m2.


Conclusion

There is 0.5km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 62516 with habitat rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. The road may be part of the Island Lake Recreational tenure or solely the responsiblity of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement.


Table 5.20: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 62516.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-23 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 62516 Diameter (m) 1.2
External ID NA Length (m) 11
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 636123 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5484087 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Lizard Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Island Lake Lodge Road Fill Depth (m) 1.3
Road Tenure MoTi recreation Outlet Drop (m) 0.49
Channel Width (m) 2.47 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 0.8
Stream Slope (%) 2.67 Inlet Drop No
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 5
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.21: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 62516.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 730 2.0 1.3 0.3 7.6 moderate high
Downstream 630 2.5 1.4 0.4 2.7 moderate high


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.

Figure 5.16: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.

Figure 5.17: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.


Gravels suitable for spawning upstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.

Figure 5.18: Gravels suitable for spawning upstream of PSCIS crossing 62516.

Appendix - Crossings 197533 and 197559

Busato Rd and Highway 43 - Brule Creek

Site Location

PSCIS crossings 197533 and 197559 are located north of Sparwood, BC on Brule Creek, approximately 600m and 725m upstream from the Elk River. During 2020 surveys, two fords (PSCIS 197535 and 197536) were documented 700m and 2km upstream of crossing 197559 respectively. Although several un-assessed crossings are modelled upstream of PSCIS 197536 (ford), review of aerial imagery indicates that the sole crossing upstream on the mainstem of Brule Creek is a bridge (modelled crossing 24706664) and the remaining upstream crossings are on small and/or very steep tributaries and unlikely to be blocking access to significant amounts of important habitat. Both Busato Road and Highway 43 are the responsibility of the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure.


Background

At the crossing locations, Brule Creek is a 5th order stream with a watershed area upstream of the highway of approximately 87km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2800 to 1200m at PSCIS crossing 197533. Brule Creek is known to contain westslope cutthrout trout, rainbow trout and bull trout downstream of the subject culverts and westslope cutthrout trout and rainbow trout above (MoE 2020b). On the south side of the upper watershed, at an elevation of 2000m is Josephine Lake (A.K.A. Big Lake) which is 5ha in area. A biophysical inventory in 1983 indicated the lake contained no fish however, it was stocked with westslope cutthrout trout from 1983 - 2000 (MoE 2020b; “Fish Inventories Data Queries” 2020).


PSCIS stream crossings 197533 and 197559 were ranked as high priorities for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large size of the stream network upstream (37km) and because Brule Creek is a 5th order stream. The habitat confirmation was completed on September 17, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082G.123.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, both culverts were un-embedded, non-backwatered and considered barriers to upstream fish passage. PSCIS crossing 197533 was 3.3m in diameter with a pipe length of 20m, a culvert slope of 4%, a stream width ratio of 2.2 and an outlet drop of 0.7m (Table 5.22). PSCIS crossing 197559 was 2.5m in diameter with a pipe length of 35m, a culvert slope of 2.5%, a stream width ratio of 2.4 and an outlet drop of 0m (Table 5.23). Water temperature was 6\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.5 and conductivity was 337uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream of 197533

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 400m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with small woody debris dominant. Cover was also present as large woody debris and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.24, Figure 5.19). The average channel width was 7.4m, the average wetted width was 4.1m and the average gradient was 1.9%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. In the area surveyed, the stream channel appeared to be anthropogenically channelized and straightened with influence of adjacent livestock grazing/access negatively impacting stream banks due to loss of riparian vegetation and erosion. Habitat was rated as medium as it was considered an important migration corridor with moderate value habitat for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream of 197533 and Downstream of 197559

The stream was surveyed upstream from 197533 for 125m to 197559. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with dominant. Cover was also present as (Table 5.24, Figure 5.20). The average channel width was 5.5m, the average wetted width was 3.8m and the average gradient was 1.5%. There was a large pool at the outlet of crossing 197559 containing approximately nine westslope cutthrout trout with lengths of five of the fish estimated at 200mm and four at 300mm (Figure 5.21). The outlet pool was depth was >1m with gravels suitable for spawning at the tailout. Habitat value was rated as high for resident and fluvial salmonid rearing and spawning.


Stream Characteristics Upstream of 197559

The stream was surveyed immediately upstream from 197559 for 1200m and then another 600m beginning at the ford (PSCIS 197536) 2km upstream for a total of 1600m. The channel was dewatered immediately upstream of Highway 43 with intermittent pools only to a distance approximately 670 m upstream. Upstream of the dewatered area, stream flows increased with increasing upstream distance. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as boulders and undercut banks (Table 5.24, Figure 5.20). The average channel width was 5.5m, the average wetted width was 2.3m and the average gradient was 3.5%. Overall, habitat upstream of 197559 was rated as high value habitat present suitable for resident and fluvial salmonid rearing and spawning.


Fish Sampling

To assess potential impacts of the culvert on fisheries values in the stream, electrofishing was conducted upstream of the crossing. Sampling was not conducted downstream of crossing 197559 as bull trout presence was suspected and it was determined that spawners and/or eggs may have been present. One site was sampled upstream with no fish captured (Figure 5.10). Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Table 5.25.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

As properties on Busato Road could be accessed from either side of the road, removal of PSCIS 197533 could be explored as an option for providing access to the 125m of habitat located upstream and below PSCIS 197533. However, to facilitate an estimate of “worst case scenario”, costs for replacement of both crossing 197533 and 197533 with bridges are estimated at $178000 and $3050000 respectively. The combined cost benefit of replacements are estimated at $1000/linear m and $3400/m2.


Conclusion

There is 0.1km of habitat upstream of crossing 197559 and another 23km upstream of 197559 rated as high value for resident and fluvial salmonid rearing/spawning. The lack of fish captured upstream of the crossing is not an indication of a lack of fish presence but may be indicative of low population densities and/or restricted access due to downstream culverts and dewatering. Although an interim ranking for remediation at the crossings was assessed as high priority to proceeding to designs for both crossings, follow up to determine the extent of dewatering during higher flow periods is recommended. Although unconfirmed at the time of reporting, the 670m section of stream located immediately upstream of Highway 43 that was flowing subsurface at the time of the survey, very likely flows above ground during high and peak flows when adult westslope cutthrout trout display a general pattern of upstream movement to spawning areas (Schweigert et al. 2017).


Table 5.22: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 197533.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-17 Crossing Sub Type Oval Culvert
PSCIS ID 197533 Diameter (m) 3.3
External ID NA Length (m) 20
Crew AI, KP Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 651626 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5528888 Backwatered No
Stream Brule Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Busato Rd Fill Depth (m) 1
Road Tenure MoTi local Outlet Drop (m) 0.7
Channel Width (m) 7.1 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 1.5
Stream Slope (%) 2 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 4
Habitat Value High Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.23: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 197559.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-17 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 197559 Diameter (m) 2.5
External ID NA Length (m) 35
Crew KP, AI Embedded Yes
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) 0.05
Easting 651516 Resemble Channel Yes
Northing 5528829 Backwatered No
Stream Brule Creek Percent Backwatered NA
Road Highway 43 Fill Depth (m) 3
Road Tenure MoTi highway Outlet Drop (m) 0
Channel Width (m) 6.1 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 1.7
Stream Slope (%) 1.5 Inlet Drop No
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 2.5
Habitat Value Medium Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.24: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossings 197533 and 197559.
Site Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
197533 Upstream 125 5.5 3.8
1.5 moderate high
197533 Downstream 400 7.4 4.1
1.9 moderate medium
197559 Upstream 1600 7.7 2.3 0.6 3.5 moderate high


Table 5.25: Electrofishing site upstream of PSCIS crossing 197559.
Site Location Width (m) Length (m) Area (m2) Effort (s) Effort (s/m2)
6 Upstream 5.1 200 1020 233 0.2


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.

Figure 5.19: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533 and downstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.

Figure 5.20: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533 and downstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.


Westlope cutthrout trout in outlet pool downstream of PSCIS crossing 197559.

Figure 5.21: Westlope cutthrout trout in outlet pool downstream of PSCIS crossing 197559.


Subsurface flow area upstream of PSCIS crossing 197559.

Figure 5.22: Subsurface flow area upstream of PSCIS crossing 197559.


Typical habitat above dewatered area upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.

Figure 5.23: Typical habitat above dewatered area upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.


Habitat within electrofishing site upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.

Figure 5.24: Habitat within electrofishing site upstream of PSCIS crossing 197533.

Appendix - Crossing 197555

Elk River FSR - Tributary to Elk River

Site Location

Crossing 197555 is located on a tributary to Elk River, approximately 900m upstream from the confluence with the Elk River. The crossing is located on the Elk River FSR approximately 10km north of Elkford, BC. The Elk River FSR is a gravel forest tenure road (forest file id 0103 with active log hauling at the time of the survey.


Background

At the crossing location, the stream is 4th order with a watershed area upstream of the road of approximately 17km2. The elevation of the watershed ranges from a maximum of 2900 to 1400m at the culvert. Upstream of the crossing, there are no anthropogenic barriers on the mainstem. Although there are two modelled crossings on small tributaries that enter the stream approximately 1.5km upstream of the road, machinery operators encountered onsite indicated that they had been removed during road deactivation. No fisheries information was available for the stream (MoE 2020d) however westslope cutthroat trout, bull trout, mountain whitefish, brook trout, longnose sucker and longnose dace (among other species) have been recorded downstream in the Elk River (MoE 2020b).


PSCIS stream crossing 197555 was ranked as a high priority for follow up with habitat confirmation due to the large amount of habitat modelled upstream of the crossing. The habitat confirmation was completed on September 16, 2020. A map of the watershed including areas surveyed is provided in Attachment 1 – Map 082J.103.


Stream Characteristics at Crossing

At the time of the survey, the un-embedded and non-backwatered 1.5m diameter crossing was considered a barrier to upstream fish passage with a pipe length of 49m, a culvert slope of 3.5%, a stream width ratio of 2.3 and an outlet drop of 1.48m (Table 5.26). Water temperature was 6\(^\circ\)C, pH was 7.2 and conductivity was 378uS/cm.


Stream Characteristics Downstream

The stream was surveyed downstream from the culvert for 700m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as moderate with deep pools dominant. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, boulders, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.27, Figure 5.25). The average channel width was 4.4m, the average wetted width was 3.1m and the average gradient was 3.6%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with gravels subdominant . There were frequent pools formed by small and large woody debris ranging from 0.3 - 0.75m in depth (average residual depth = 0.4m). Frequent pockets of gravels suitably sized for resident and fluvial salmonid spawning were also present. Habitat value was rated as high with good potential for fry/juvenile salmonid rearing.


Stream Characteristics Upstream

The stream was surveyed upstream from the culvert for 675m. Overall, total cover amount was rated as abundant with boulders as the dominant type. Cover was also present as small woody debris, large woody debris, undercut banks, deep pools, and overhanging vegetation (Table 5.27, Figure 5.26). The average channel width was 5.9m, the average wetted width was 3.8m and the average gradient was 5.9%. The dominant substrate was cobbles with boulders subdominant. The stream had good flows with fry observed throughout the area surveyed. Pools to 0.6m deep (average residual depth = 0.4m) were present with pockets of gravel suitable for spawning throughout. Infrequent large woody debris jams to 0.5m high were also observed. Pockets of gravel suitable for resident and fluvial salmonid spawning were present throughout the area surveyed. Habitat value was rated as high for fry and juvenile westslope cutthrout trout and bull trout rearing.


Fish Sampling

To assess potential impacts of the culvert on fish communities in the stream, electrofishing was conducted upstream and downstream of the crossing. One 150m site was sampled upstream and one 315m site was sampled downstream. One bull trout was captured downstream and no fish were captured upstream (Figure 5.27). Raw results are included in digital format as Attachment 2 and summarized in Table 5.28.


Structure Remediation and Cost Estimate

Structure replacement with an open bottomed culvert is recommended to provide access to the habitat located upstream of PSCIS crossing 197555. Due to the large amount of fill on the road (8) the size of a replacement bridge was estimated at 25m. The cost for work is estimated at $312000 for a cost benefit of $21900/linear m and $38400/m2.

Conclusion

There is an estimated 6km of mainstem habitat upstream of crossing 197555 with habitat in the areas surveyed upstream of the crossing rated as high value for fry and juvenile salmonid rearing. However, fish sampling results indicate that westslope cutthrout trout are not currently utilizing the stream and densities of bull trout are very low. This could be the result of the cold water conditions due to the positioning of the watershed at high elevation in the generally cold Rocky Mountain setting. Elk River FSR is a forest tenure liscensee road of the Ministry of Forests, Lands, Natural Resource Operations & Rural Development. The crossing was ranked as a moderate priority for proceeding to design for replacement with an open bottomed structure.


Table 5.26: Summary of fish passage reassessment for PSCIS crossing 197555.
Location and Stream Data
Crossing Characteristics
Date 2020-09-16 Crossing Sub Type Round Culvert
PSCIS ID 197555 Diameter (m) 1.5
External ID NA Length (m) 49
Crew KP, AI Embedded No
UTM Zone 11 Depth Embedded (m) NA
Easting 646735 Resemble Channel No
Northing 5554534 Backwatered No
Stream Tributary to Elk River Percent Backwatered NA
Road Elk River FSR Fill Depth (m) 8
Road Tenure FLNR 0103 Outlet Drop (m) 1.48
Channel Width (m) 3.5 Outlet Pool Depth (m) 1.3
Stream Slope (%) 1.5 Inlet Drop Yes
Beaver Activity No Slope (%) 3.5
Habitat Value High Valley Fill Deep Fill
Photos:


Table 5.27: Summary of habitat details for PSCIS crossing 197555.
Location Length Surveyed (m) Channel Width (m) Wetted Width (m) Pool Depth (m) Gradient (%) Total Cover Habitat Value
Upstream 675 5.9 3.8 0.4 5.9 abundant high
Downstream 700 4.4 3.1 0.4 3.6 moderate high


Table 5.28: Electrofishing sites for PSCIS crossing 197555.
Site Location Width (m) Length (m) Area (m2) Effort (s) Effort (s/m2)
4 Downstream 3.1 315 976 550 0.6
3 Upstream 3.8 150 570 177 0.3


Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.

Figure 5.25: Typical habitat downstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.


Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.

Figure 5.26: Typical habitat upstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.


Bull trout captured downstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.

Figure 5.27: Bull trout captured downstream of PSCIS crossing 197555.

References

Allaire, JJ, Yihui Xie, Jonathan McPherson, Javier Luraschi, Kevin Ushey, Aron Atkins, Hadley Wickham, Joe Cheng, Winston Chang, and Richard Iannone. 2020. Rmarkdown: Dynamic Documents for R. https://github.com/rstudio/rmarkdown.

Bell, M. C. 1991. “Fisheries Handbook of Engineering Requirements and Biological Criteria.” https://www.fs.fed.us/biology/nsaec/fishxing/fplibrary/Bell_1991_Fisheries_handbook_of_engineering_requirements_and.pdf.

Bramblett, Robert, Mason Bryant, Brenda Wright, and Robert White. 2002. “Seasonal Use of Small Tributary and Main-Stem Habitats by Juvenile Steelhead, Coho Salmon, and Dolly Varden in a Southeastern Alaska Drainage Basin.” Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 131: 498–506. https://doi.org/10.1577/1548-8659(2002)131<0498:SUOSTA>2.0.CO;2.

Clarkin, K, A Connor, M Furniss, B Gubernick, M Love, K Moynan, and S WilsonMusser. 2005. “National Inventory and Assessment Procedure for Identifying Barriers to Aquatic Organism Passage at Road-Stream Crossings.” United States Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, National Technology and Development Program. https://www.fs.fed.us/biology/nsaec/fishxing/publications/PDFs/NIAP.pdf.

“Fish Inventories Data Queries.” 2020. Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - Knowledge Management. 2020. http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/fidq/welcome.do.

Fish Passage Technical Working Group. 2011. “A Checklist for Fish Habitat Confirmation Prior to the Rehabilitation Fo a Stream Crossing.” https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/land-based-investment/forests-for-tomorrow/checklist-for-fish-habitat-confirmation-201112.pdf.

———. 2014. “Fish Passage Strategic Approach: Protocl for Prioritizing Sites for Fish Passage Remediation.” https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/plants-animals-and-ecosystems/fish-fish-habitat/fish-passage/strategic20approach20july202014.pdf.

FLNRORD. 2020a. “Digital Road Atlas (DRA) - Master Partially-Attributed Roads - Data Catalogue.” 2020. https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/digital-road-atlas-dra-master-partially-attributed-roads.

———. 2020b. “Forest Tenure Road Section Lines - Data Catalogue.” 2020. https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/forest-tenure-road-section-lines.

Grainger, Karen L. 2011. “2011 Fish Passage Culvert Assessments Within the Rocky Mountain Resource District.”

Masse Environmental Consultants Ltd. 2015. “Fish Habitat Confirmation Assessments – East Kootenay Area Project PD15TFE010.”

MoE. 2011. “Field Assessment for Determining Fish Passage Status of Closed Bottom Structures.” BC Ministry of Environment (MoE). https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/natural-resource-stewardship/land-based-investment/forests-for-tomorrow/field-assessment-for-determining-fish-passage-status-of-cbs.pdf.

———. 2020a. “Fish Inventories Data Queries.” Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - Knowledge Management. 2020. http://a100.gov.bc.ca/pub/fidq/searchSingleWaterbody.do.

———. 2020b. “Known BC Fish Observations and BC Fish Distributions.” Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - Knowledge Management. 2020. https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/known-bc-fish-observations-and-bc-fish-distributions.

———. 2020c. “Provincial Obstacles to Fish Passage - Data Catalogue.” Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - Knowledge Management. 2020. https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/provincial-obstacles-to-fish-passage.

———. 2020d. “Stream Inventory Sample Sites.” Ministry of Environment and Climate Change Strategy - Knowledge Management. 2020. https://catalogue.data.gov.bc.ca/dataset/stream-inventory-sample-sites.

Norris, Simon. 2020. Bcfishpass. Hillcrest Geographics. https://github.com/smnorris/bcfishpass.

Norris, Simon, and Craig Mount. 2016. “Fish Passage GIS Analysis Version 2.2 – Methodology and Output Data Specifications.” https://data.skeenasalmon.info/dataset/bc-fish-passage-program.

QGIS Development Team. 2009. QGIS Geographic Information System. Open Source Geospatial Foundation. http://qgis.osgeo.org.

Saldi-Caromile, K, K Bates, P Skidmore, J Barenti, and D Pineo. 2004. “Stream Habitat Restoration Guidelines: Final Draft.” https://wdfw.wa.gov/sites/default/files/publications/00043/wdfw00043.pdf.

Schweigert, J. F, John Robert Post, Canada, Environment, limate Change Canada, Canadian Wildlife Service, and Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada. 2017. COSEWIC Assessment and Status Report on the Westslope Cutthroat Trout, Oncorhynchus Clarkii Lewisi, Saskatchewan-Nelson River Populations, Pacific Populations, in Canada. Ottawa: Environment and Climate Change Canada. http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/eccc/CW69-14-506-2017-eng.pdf.

Slaney, P. A, Daiva O Zaldokas, and Watershed Restoration Program (B.C.). 1997. Fish Habitat Rehabilitation Procedures. Vancouver, B.C.: Watershed Restoration Program. https://www.for.gov.bc.ca/hfd/library/FFIP/Slaney_PA1997_A.pdf.

Swales, Stephen, and C. Levings. 1989. “Role of Off-Channel Ponds in the Life Cycle of Coho Salmon ( Oncorhynchus Kisutch ) and Other Juvenile Salmonids in the Coldwater River, British Columbia.” Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences - CAN J FISHERIES AQUAT SCI 46: 232–42. https://doi.org/10.1139/f89-032.

Thompson, Richard. 2013. “Assessing Fish Passage at Culverts – the Method, Its Metrics and Preliminary Findings from over 4,000 Assessments.” https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/environment/plants-animals-and-ecosystems/fish-fish-habitat/fish-passage/assessing_fish_passage_at_culverts.pdf.

VAST Resource Solutions Inc. 2013. “2012 Fish Passage Assessments in BCTS Kootenay Business Area (PD13TFE006).” http://a100.gov.bc.ca/appsdata/acat/documents/r43047/PD13TFE006_VAST_FinalReport_1405379598103_5374008940.pdf.

Xie, Yihui. 2016. Bookdown: Authoring Books and Technical Documents with R Markdown. Boca Raton, Florida: Chapman; Hall/CRC. https://github.com/rstudio/bookdown.